IS LEARNING IN LATER LIFE LEISURE?
Sherry Coulson, University of Waterloo
Sherry Dupuis, University of Waterloo
Introduction
Approximately five percent of Canadians over the age of 65 years participate in
some type of formal education program (National Advisory Council on Aging, 2001). It
is estimated that the numbers of older adults participating in later life learning activities
will increase as the baby boomers enter their retirement years healthier, better educated,
and better informed than the generation preceding them. In fact, MacNeil (2001) predicts
that increased educational attainment will mean that more and more older adults will seek
out educational opportunities as a “pursuit and focal point for leisure interest” (p. 55).
Despite the growing popularity of later life learning among older adults, little research
has been conducted on the meaning of learning in later life. od. This study explored the
meaning of learning for women and men over the age of 60 years who were participants
in one of two learning activities, one formal (i.e., for-credit, university classroom) and
one normal (i.e., non-credit, older adult classroom). Guided by a symbolic interactionist
approach (Blumer, 1969), we set out to explore learning in later life as a possible leisure
activity and the role that learning plays within the lives of the older adult participants.
This presentation will focus on the findings of this study relating to the relationship
between later life learning and leisure. Specifically, how different meanings of leisure can
impact perceptions of whether or not learning is considered leisure.
Methods
This study drew on the grounded theory approach put forward by Strauss and
Corbin (1998). Using both purposive selective sampling (Sandelowski, Holditch-Davis,
& Glenn Harris, 1992) and theoretical sampling (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), participants
were recruited from two different learning environments; half of the participants were
enrolled in for-credit courses at the University of Waterloo, whereas the other half were
recruited from the Laurier Association for Lifelong Learning (LALL), which offers noncredit, age-segregated courses based on the members interests. A total of 20 participants
were recruited in order to reach theoretical saturation. The demographics of the
participants were consistent with previous research. The final sample included 13 women
and 7 men, ranging in age from 60 to 83 years, with the mean age of 70 years. The
majority of the sample (n=11) were married and all were Caucasian. Most of the older
learners had high levels of initial education (i.e., high school diplomas with some
university/professional degrees), although it was difficult in some cases to distinguish
initial education from continuing and later life education as many had participated in
learning activities across their lives.
In-depth, active interviews (as described by Holstein and Gubrium, 1995) were
used as the primary data collection strategy. Interview questions focused on the
participant’ past and current experiences of learning, the meaning of learning for the
participants, the connection between learning and leisure, and the relationship of learning
to the rest of the participants’ lives. Interviews ranged from forty minutes to three hours
in length. All of the interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data
analysis began with the first interview using the constant comparative method (Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). Once all the data had been collected and formally analysed into an
emerging grounded theory, a member check focus group, lasting two and a half hours,
was conducted with a group of five of the participants in order to enhance the credibility
of the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Findings
The main overarching theme that emerged from the data was that of “Learning as
Life”. Learning, for these participants, was incredibly meaningful and played an integral
role in their lives. The meaning that participants gave to their learning went beyond the
traditional conceptualizations of lifelong learning and learning in later life. Learning was
seen as more than just a pastime or something to do. Learning was really seen as a
lifelong activity – it would never end, nor did the participants want it to. Learning was
not compartmentalized as just one part of their lives – it was present in all aspects of their
lives and in everything they did. Carol, a retired occupational therapist who was
participating in LALL, for example, did not see learning as only one part of life. She
stated: “I don’t compartmentalise it as, you know, that this is a learning opportunity and
this isn’t. I think you’re sort of, sit down and read the paper, you’re learning
something…I try a new recipe, I’m learning something.” Learning was seen as a gift and
was described with words like love and passion. Participants found learning so
meaningful and valued it so highly that they saw learning not only as a central part of
their lives but also as life itself. Inez, a retired librarian originally from Germany who
was taking courses through LALL described her learning as “you should always learn,
because it is really life. Life is learning.” Three major themes reflecting Learning as Life
for the participants emerged and included: satisfaction of needs through learning, learning
as a source of enrichment, and new awakening through learning in later life. Interestingly,
the context and content of learning was less important for these older learners than the act
of learning itself. When examining the meaning of learning for the participants, there
were no major differences between those taking courses for credit and non-credit
learners.
One objective of the study was to examine whether or not older adults perceived
their learning to be leisure. Whether or not learning could be considered leisure for these
participants was really dependant on the meaning participants attached to leisure.
Participants were asked how they perceived their learning: as work, leisure, a
combination of work and leisure, or something completely different. Participants’
definitions of leisure fell into one of three categories. First, some of the participants
viewed leisure as negative (e.g., doing nothing, drinking beer and watching TV, laziness)
and, therefore, learning was not perceived as leisure for them. Another group of
participants did not have a negative view of leisure, but believed that their
conceptualization of leisure was not sufficient to describe their learning. These
participants saw their learning as something more than leisure. Pam, for example,
described learning as follows: “It’s more than that (leisure), isn’t it? I don’t know what
I’d call it. It’s really more of a profound interest than just because I have leisure time. I
think of leisure as more time filling. It’s more important than just a time filler. It’s
fulfilling, fascinating, a sense of challenge and just the thrill of acquiring knowledge.”
Finally, some of the participants felt that learning could be conceptualized as leisure
according to their own definitions. Norman defined leisure as “whatever you like to do
with your free time. So I like to learn, so my activity, my learning is leisure.”
Nonetheless, most of the participants viewed their learning as something greater than
leisure – more meaningful, it meant more to them than leisure.
Discussion
Learning was viewed as important, meaningful, intrinsically rewarding, and an
integral part of life for the participants in this study. “Learning as Life” may be seen as an
extension of the concept of learning for its own sake, an integrate attribute of leisure
(Mannell & Kleiber, 1997). Other studies on later life learning have also found that
learning is done for personal interest, the love of learning, enrichment and personal
growth, and the joy of learning (e.g., Boshier & Riddell, 1978; Bynum & Seaman, 1993;
Houle, 1961). Learning was done for its own sake; participation was an end in itself. This
study shows that learning for these older adults does include a number of the traditionally
defined attributes of leisure, however, for most of the participants, learning was given
more value than “just a leisure activity”.
Additionally, while not every participant in this study could be considered a
liberal arts hobbyist, their descriptions of their learning parallel many of the attributes
that are associated with serious leisure. Participants experienced many of the
characteristics of serious leisure, particularly the liberal arts hobby. Learning required
effort on the part of the participant and there were many benefits associated with
participation. Many of these later life learners negotiated barriers to participation and
persevered over long periods of time to complete a program of study or develop new
skills. Once again, however, these participants did not view their learning to be leisure,
they saw it as life itself.
The disconnect between how these participants’ described their learning and how
leisure attributes found in the research data suggest that learning is leisure, highlights an
important issue facing leisure researchers. While many of the fundamental attributes of
leisure cited in the literature could be seen in the participants’ experiences, when asked,
most of the participants themselves did not equate their learning with leisure. As
researchers, do we tend to accept our traditional definitions of leisure over the meaning
that the participants attach to the activity? As illustrated in this study, how leisure
researchers conceptualize activities and how participants conceptualize these same
activities, can be quite different. As leisure researchers, especially those of us working
within a qualitative paradigm, how do we reconcile these differences and how best can
we further our knowledge in the leisure field, while acknowledging the meanings that
participants’ attribute to their activities? In this study, two solitudes existed: “Learning as
Life” as conceptualized by the later life learners; and “Learning as Leisure”, as suggested
by the application of leisure attributes to the data.
References
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Boshier, R., & Riddell, G. (1978). Education participation scale factor structure for older
adults. Adult Education, 28, 165-175.
Bynum, L., & Seaman, M. (1993). Motivations of third-age students in learning-inretirement institutes. Continuing Higher Education Review, 57(1/2), 12-22.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Houle, C. (1961). The inquiring mind. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Press.
Jamieson, A., Miller, A., & Stafford, J. (1998). Education in a life course perspective:
Continuities and discontinuities. Education and Ageing, 13(3), 213-228.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
MacNeil, R. (2001). Bob Dylan and the baby boom generation: The times they are achangin’ – again. Activities, Adaptation, & Aging, 25(3/4), 45-58.
Mannell, R., & Kleiber, D. (1997). A social psychology of leisure. State College, PA:
Venture Publishing.
National Advisory Council on Aging. (2001). Report card: Seniors in Canada. Ottawa,
ON: Government of Canada Publication.
Sandelowski, M., Holditch-Davis, D., & Glenn Harris, B. (1992). Using qualitative and
quantitative methods: The transition to parenthood for infertile couples. In J.F.
Gilgun, K. Daly, & G Handel (Eds.), Qualitative methods in family research (pp.
310-322). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure.
Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998a). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd. Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications
ABSTRACTS
of Papers Presented at the
Eleventh Canadian Congress on Leisure Research
May 17 – 20, 2005
Hosted by
Department of Recreation and Tourism Management
Malaspina University-College
Nanaimo, B.C.
Abstracts compiled and edited by
Tom Delamere, Carleigh Randall, David Robinson
CCLR-11 Programme Committee
Tom Delamere
Dan McDonald
Carleigh Randall
Rick Rollins
and
David Robinson
Copyright © 2005 Canadian Association for Leisure Studies
ISBN 1-896886-01-9